Re: [PATCH 00/48] Make the IRQCHIP_DECLARE macro globally accessible

[Joël Porquet]

On Thursday, July 02, 2015 09:06:34 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, JoÃl Porquet wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 02, 2015 12:33:05 PM Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > > On Thursday 02 July 2015 04:02 AM, Joel Porquet wrote:
> > > > At the moment the IRQCHIP_DECLARE macro is only declared locally in
> > > > 'drivers/irqchip/irqchip.h'. That prevents from using it directly in
> > > > arch/*
> > > > directories whenever irqchip drivers only exist there, which happens
> > > > in a
> > > > few cases (e.g. arc, arm, microblaze and mips).
> > > > 
> > > > This patch makes the macro to be globally defined, in
> > > > include/linux/irqchip.h, and thus usable for arch-specific
> > > > declarations
> > > > of irqchip drivers. In this way, it is very similar to what
> > > > clocksource
> > > > does (ie CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE is defined in
> > > > include/linux/clocksource.h).
> > > > 
> > > > I split up everything into patches to make the integration easier.
> > > > Please
> > > > let me know if it's not, and in such case how to make it better.
> > > > 
> > > > For now, patch 01 of this series transfers the declaration of the
> > > > macro
> > > > IRQCHIP_DECLARE to the global header 'include/linux/irqchip.h'. The
> > > > following patches, from 02 to 47, modify all the irqchip drivers that
> > > > use
> > > > IRQCHIP_DECLARE, one by one. And finally, the last patch 48 removes
> > > > the
> > > > private and now useless header 'drivers/irqchip/irqchip.h'.
> > > 
> > > Hi Joel,
> > > 
> > > I don't see the rest of series on lkml and/or the patch which touches
> > > arch/arc. Also, you may wanna redo this after 4.2-rc1 anyways. For ARC
> > > atleast, there's a new intc which would also require similar fixup.
> > > There
> > > might be others ....
> > > 
> > > Thx,
> > > -Vineet
> > 
> > Hi Vineet (and all),
> > 
> > Sorry for the mistake, I hope I didn't spam anyone (too much). I realized
> > to late that sending about fifty patches to 26 recipients was probably
> > not a good idea, and my smtp provider would have blocked me before the
> > end anyway.
> > 
> > Therefore I will follow your suggestion and wait until after 4.2-rc1. Then
> > I'll resubmit a new patchset that takes into account the new intc(s) as
> > well.
> > 
> > But since this patchset affects many files across several drivers and
> > architectures, what would be the best way to submit it?
> > 
> > Would it be OK to send the cover to all the maintainers/mailing-lists
> > involved in order to inform them that a patchset is affecting their
> > respective subsystem, but to send the patches only on the kernel
> > mailing-list?
> > 
> > And/or is there someone in particular who is in charge to integrate such a
> > transversal patchset?
> 
> The best thing is to move the macro to include/linux/irqchip.h now and
> include linux/irqchip in drivers/irqchip/irqchip.h.
> 
> That's a safe change and I can queue it right away and merge it into
> rc1.
> 
> So after that I can queue the drivers/irqchip patches in my tree and
> remove local header file for 4.3. The changes for stuff which is
> outside of drivers/irqchip and depends on the global visible macro can
> be queued in the relevant maintainer trees.
> 
> Can you send me a patch which moves the macro and includes
> linux/irqchip from the local header file?

Done!

For the drivers/irqchip patches, would you prefer many patches (ie one per 
driver and one for the header removal) or one patch that includes everything 
or something in between?

Thanks for your help!

JoÃl
 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/